Tehran is a disproportionate land for Stark, as critically armed forces supported by global superpowers raid the boundaries of poor, besieged countries. Those trapped behind border fences stand on the ground with only stones and flags against tanks and soldiers. The world’s media sways between terms such as “legitimate defense” and “right to life.” Leading the attack is a commander who has long been protected from accountability by diplomatic alliances and military support. And then suddenly, the hero descends from the sky – uninvited, unrelated, moved by his will alone to save a life.
What you just read is not a report on the Middle East or an analysis of current global politics. It’s a fictional film plot lined up by audiences around the world to watch “Superman” (2025).
Written and directed by James Gunn, the film was released on July 11, 2025 and has attracted international attention for its political undertones over the past three weeks.
“It feels like a major cultural moment when Israel is a country of villains in big budget Hollywood movies,” X-user wrote.
Boravia as Israel
In the 2025 film “Superman,” a fictional, powerful Boravian nation supported by a militaristic billionaire named Lex Luthor, seeks to invade and occupy the poor, besieged, besieged Jalhanpur. With the world government still silence, Superman crosses political boundaries without hesitation in protecting the vulnerable people of Jalhanpur.
Casting choices enhance the ratio phor. The Boravians are portrayed by white actors, while Jalhanpurian is played by Middle Eastern, South Asian and black actors.
Viewers have described the cancer film as anti-Israel and interpreted Jalhanpur as a fictional reflection of Palestinians. This is the land where people are being slaughtered by ruthless, heavy military Boravia (who is seen as Israel’s substitute). Boravian President Vasil Gulkos has been shown to receive military, financial and strategic support from a wealthy American tech giant compared to Donald Trump.
US Diplomacy vs Superman’s Duty
In this story, Superman breaks out of his usual stereotypical role. He is no longer a representative seeking American justice to fight bank robberies and aliens. This time, the United States itself is part of the villain front, with Superman constantly being criticized and even arrested for standing up for the oppressed people of the fictional country and intervening without legal approval or cooperation with the US government.
His interview with Lois Lane directly reflects our foreign diplomatic discourse. In that exchange, Superman defines himself as someone who is trying to distance himself from America and simply save innocent lives under oppression.
At one point, Lois questioned Superman’s involvement in the conflict by claiming that the people of Jalhanpur are not “innocent.” This part of the dialogue rigorously exposes the narratives of Western media and the cruelty of Zionist propaganda, which seek to justify Palestinian atrocities and dehumanization.
By using arguments such as “they voted for Hamas,” and labeling them as “anti-Semitism,” such stories undermine the moral obligation to stand with the oppressed nations. In response, Superman declares that the people of Jalhanpur need not be “innocent” to be deserving protection.
Moreover, the hero’s attitude is a different world from the morally vague and relative tones that the United States has often been taken towards oppressed countries. Superman doesn’t fall into the trap of “both of them are wrong.” Instead, he takes a clear stand on the side of justice and actively seeks to punish the attacker. And, therefore, this version of Superman is no longer our favorite.
In an interview with comicbook.com, James Gunn firmly rejected his film’s connection to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, saying, “When I wrote this, there was no Middle Eastern conflict. So I tried to do something small to keep it apart, but it has nothing to do with the Middle East.”
Netanyahu and Bengulion blend
A small number of media have attempted to use the conflict between Boravia and Jalhanpur as an example of the war between Russia and Ukraine, but the film’s narrative structure, power dynamics, and the response of the US government suggest that the parallel between Israel and Palestinian is far more fitting.
Unlike Russia, Boravia is an ally of the United States, and the US opposition to Superman’s intervention against Boravian invasion is in stark contrast to the US’s enthusiastic support for Ukraine in its defense against Russian aggression.
With Slavic accents and visual style reminiscent of Benjamin Netanyahu, Vasilgrukos looks more like a caricature version of the Zionist prime minister than Vladimir Putin (not to mention that the Boravian president is physically similar to David Ben-Gurion). Furthermore, the harsh racial contrasts – white Boravians and brown-skinned Jalhanprians – clearly evoke the image of the Israeli and Palestinian wars in Russia and Ukraine.
In a desperate attempt to divert these comparisons, the Jerusalem post published articles attempting to associate Boravian dictatorship with Iran and Hamas, and ultimately settled on the superficial similarities between the Glucos and Russian leaders as a way to redirect all stories.
Luthor’s Abu Ghraib and Unit 8200
Over the course of the story, as Superman surrenders himself to the government, Lex Luther takes him to his secret nightmare prison. Luther explains that he will rent some of the prison cells to a government that is quietly trying to detain political opponents without justification.
This part of the film undoubtedly evokes memories of extrajudicial detention centres like Guantanamo Bay and Abu Ghraib. This is an establishment that the United States had a non-legal accountability individual in the fight against terrorism.
In this same creepy place, Luthor announces Cyber Army. Coordinating an online hatred campaign against Superman, a group of robot monkeys stationed behind a computer screen. This portrayal of digital warfare by supervillains is virtually unprecedented in superhero stories, and urges Unit 8200, the elite cyber intelligence division of the Zionist administration.
A real playing card
The all story of the film becomes even more clear when it is revealed that Lex Luther, a ruthless billionaire who is clearly similar to Donald Trump, is supplying weapons to Boravia in exchange for much of Jalhampurian’s land. This plotline reflects the active role of the United States in funding, arming and politically supporting Israeli settler colonialism. At a press conference with Benjamin Netanyahu on February 4, 2025, he publicly declared, “We intend to take over Gaza, and will own it,” reflecting this dynamic, Donald Trump.
The statement effectively outlined the vision for full American control and redevelopment of the Gaza Strip. This reflects the same imperial logic that films criticize through sci-fi stories.
The world loves anti-Israel superman
James Gunn’s “Superman” surpassed $300 million at the US box office within its first three weeks, making it the most successful solo Superman film in domestic history, surpassing Man of Steel (2013). This commercial success comes despite a specific Israeli boycott campaign on the film’s anti-genocide subtext.
The film faces backlash from the pro-Israel media and commentators. The Jerusalem post wrote: “It’s so rude and painful as a superhero created by two Jewish artists are now being used to promote anti-Israel messages…”
Similarly, Ben Shapiro, a well-known right-wing commentator and solid defender of Israel, responded with the brief saying “not good.”
Superman was created by two young Jewish artists, Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster, and his Jewish roots are widely explored. Adding to this irony, James Gunn’s lead role in the 2025 film is played by Jewish actor David Corenswett, despite Zionist critics accusing the film of delivering an anti-Israel message.
Just as international audiences once compared Gazan’s light-form to the “Hunger Games” story, their reaction to the new Superman film shows that even while watching sci-fi blockbusters, many are still looking for real-world reflections.
Despite the powerful media stories and Zionist propaganda, these viewers want to know the truth. Who is the real oppressor, who is the real victim, where is the real hero standing?
AH/SAB